EnclavedMicrostate在2022-09-19~2022-09-25的言论

2022-09-25 作者: EnclavedMicrostate 原文 #Reddit 的其它文章

810: ISO a specific passage about Appomattox?, submitted on 2022-09-19 10:31:23+08:00.

—– 810.1 —–2022-09-19 15:00:14+08:00:

Please repost this question to the weekly “Short Answers” thread stickied to the top of the subreddit, which will be the best place to get an answer to this question; for that reason, we have removed your post here. Standalone questions are intended to be seeking detailed, comprehensive answers, and we ask that questions looking for a name, a number, a date or time, a location, the origin of a word, the first/last instance of a specific phenomenon, or a simple list of examples or facts be contained to that thread as they are more likely to receive an answer there. For more information on this rule, please see this Rules Roundtable.

Alternatively, if you didn’t mean to ask a question seeking a short answer or a list of examples, but have a more complex question in mind, feel free to repost a reworded question. Examples of questions appropriate for the ‘Short Answers’ thread would be “Who won the 1932 election?” or “What are some famous natural disasters from the past?”. Versions more appropriate as standalone questions would be “How did FDR win the 1932 election?”, or “In your area of expertise, how did people deal with natural disasters?” If you need some pointers, be sure to check out this Rules Roundtable on asking better questions.

Finally, don’t forget that there are many subreddits on Reddit aimed at answering your questions. Consider /r/AskHistory (which has lighter moderation but similar topic matter to /r/AskHistorians), /r/explainlikeimfive (which is specifically aimed at simple and easily digested answers), or /r/etymology (which focuses on the origins of words and phrases).

811: Are we witnessing a possible ww3 setup?, submitted on 2022-09-19 11:33:32+08:00.

—– 811.1 —–2022-09-19 14:59:52+08:00:

This submission has been removed because it involves current events. To keep from discussion of politics, we have a 20-year rule here. You may want to try /r/ask_politics, /r/NeutralPolitics, or another current-events focused sub. For further explanation of this rule, feel free to consult this Rules Roundtable.

812: Who would win in a fight: a group of 100 tuscarora warriors vs 5 modern day highly skilled US marines with modern equipment?, submitted on 2022-09-19 12:05:44+08:00.

—– 812.1 —–2022-09-19 14:59:48+08:00:

Sorry, but your submission has been removed because we don’t allow hypothetical questions. If possible, please rephrase the question so that it does not call for such speculation, and resubmit. Otherwise, this sort of thing is better suited for /r/HistoryWhatIf or /r/HistoricalWhatIf. You can find a more in-depth discussion of this rule here.

813: How are nonbinary people supposed to express themselves in languages which have only two grammatical genders?, submitted on 2022-09-19 12:35:44+08:00.

—– 813.1 —–2022-09-19 15:00:41+08:00:

Apologies, but we have had to remove your submission. We ask that questions in this subreddit be limited to those asking about history, or for historical answers. This is not a judgement of your question, but to receive the answer you are looking for, it would be better suited to r/linguistics.

If you are interested in an historical answer, however, you are welcome to rework your question to fit the theme of this subreddit and resubmit it.

814: How much would it cost me to organize a medieval rally of 10,000 people including 100 rented horses/armor and weapon for the 10,000?, submitted on 2022-09-19 12:51:24+08:00.

—– 814.1 —–2022-09-19 14:59:23+08:00:

This submission has been removed because it violates our ‘20-Year Rule’. To discourage off-topic discussions of current events, questions, answers, and all other comments must be confined to events that happened 20 years ago or more. For further explanation of this rule, feel free to consult this Rules Roundtable.

815: Should an ordinary Turk preserve his Roman heritage?, submitted on 2022-09-19 22:27:26+08:00.

—– 815.1 —–2022-09-19 23:42:10+08:00:

This submission has been removed because it is soapboxing or moralizing: it has the effect of promoting an opinion on contemporary politics or social issues at the expense of historical integrity. There are certainly historical topics that relate to contemporary issues and it is possible for legitimate interpretations that differ from each other to come out of looking at the past through different political lenses. However, we will remove questions that put a deliberate slant on their subject or solicit answers that align with a specific pre-existing view.

816: In what Country did Knighthood originate?, submitted on 2022-09-20 13:01:10+08:00.

—– 816.1 —–2022-09-20 15:46:47+08:00:

Please repost this question to the weekly “Short Answers” thread stickied to the top of the subreddit, which will be the best place to get an answer to this question; for that reason, we have removed your post here. Standalone questions are intended to be seeking detailed, comprehensive answers, and we ask that questions looking for a name, a number, a date or time, a location, the origin of a word, the first/last instance of a specific phenomenon, or a simple list of examples or facts be contained to that thread as they are more likely to receive an answer there. For more information on this rule, please see this Rules Roundtable.

Alternatively, if you didn’t mean to ask a question seeking a short answer or a list of examples, but have a more complex question in mind, feel free to repost a reworded question. Examples of questions appropriate for the ‘Short Answers’ thread would be “Who won the 1932 election?” or “What are some famous natural disasters from the past?”. Versions more appropriate as standalone questions would be “How did FDR win the 1932 election?”, or “In your area of expertise, how did people deal with natural disasters?” If you need some pointers, be sure to check out this Rules Roundtable on asking better questions.

Finally, don’t forget that there are many subreddits on Reddit aimed at answering your questions. Consider /r/AskHistory (which has lighter moderation but similar topic matter to /r/AskHistorians), /r/explainlikeimfive (which is specifically aimed at simple and easily digested answers), or /r/etymology (which focuses on the origins of words and phrases).

817: How did the Burmese monarchy successfully handled the politics of the various ethnicities and how did the Brits played a role in the current instabilities of Myanmar today by destroying that successful system of Burmese native government?, submitted on 2022-09-20 13:40:28+08:00.

—– 817.1 —–2022-09-20 15:46:57+08:00:

This submission has been removed because it involves current events. To keep from discussion of politics, we have a 20-year rule here. You may want to try /r/ask_politics, /r/NeutralPolitics, or another current-events focused sub. For further explanation of this rule, feel free to consult this Rules Roundtable.

818: Will history as a PhD-level discipline eventually die?, submitted on 2022-09-20 14:19:15+08:00.

—– 818.1 —–2022-09-20 15:46:30+08:00:

Sorry, but your submission has been removed because we don’t allow hypothetical questions. If possible, please rephrase the question so that it does not call for such speculation, and resubmit. Otherwise, this sort of thing is better suited for /r/HistoryWhatIf or /r/HistoricalWhatIf. You can find a more in-depth discussion of this rule here.

819: All 3 Axis Powers have a rapidly aging population. Coincidence?, submitted on 2022-09-20 14:57:02+08:00.

—– 819.1 —–2022-09-20 15:46:40+08:00:

This submission has been removed because it violates our ‘20-Year Rule’. To discourage off-topic discussions of current events, questions, answers, and all other comments must be confined to events that happened 20 years ago or more. For further explanation of this rule, feel free to consult this Rules Roundtable.

820: I’m Dr. Christian Raffensperger, author of Reimagining Europe: Kievan Rus’ in the Medieval World, and I’m here to talk about medieval eastern Europe and, if you’re interested, the medieval factors in the war in Ukraine. AMA!, submitted on 2022-09-20 20:50:14+08:00.

—– 820.1 —–2022-09-20 21:17:15+08:00:

Hi Dr Raffensperger, thanks for coming on to do this AMA with us.

My very superficial impression of Kievan Rus’ is that it was dominated, at least politically and commercially, by Norse peoples, but that over time the Rus’ polities increasingly reverted to the control of native Slavic dynasties. I feel like I can already guess that this impression is incorrect or at best horrifically oversimplified, but what actually was the relationship between Norse, Slavic, and indeed other peoples within the Rus’ polity? Were Norse traders actually a relatively transient community whose influence declined? Did a more hybridised identity emerge that flattened out the differences, so to speak?

—– 820.2 —–2022-09-20 23:27:51+08:00:

Thank you!

821: Short Answers to Simple Questions | September 21, 2022, submitted on 2022-09-21 21:00:09+08:00.

—– 821.1 —–2022-09-24 20:36:12+08:00:

We have removed your comment, as sources are required for all answers posted in SASQ. If you can add sources to your answer then please notify us via modmail so it can be reviewed.

822: TIL a section of the great wall of China stretches into Russia, submitted on 2022-09-22 22:49:37+08:00.

—– 822.1 —–2022-09-23 21:42:19+08:00:

Thanks to /u/Fluffy_Shoulder_57 for the ping. I’ll re-link the relevant AH answer here, but to condense out the key points, the ‘wall’ in Mongolia and Russia is in fact a set of earthworks built by non-Chinese states that happen to occasionally but inconsistently form part of the ‘canonical’ succession of ‘dynasties’, and 500 years before the actual ‘Great Wall’ built by the Ming. Earlier walls were actually very similar in construction, being un-reinforced earthworks, and had been long in disrepair since their abandonment during the Han. While the (non-Chinese) Northern Wei and Qi states built walls around Datong, this was a very limited set of construction compared to the earlier Warring States and later Ming efforts. In practical terms, the only fortifications we can seriously call the ‘Great Wall’ are the Warring States-to-Han defences and then the Ming network, with basically no equivalent in between.

—– 822.2 —–2022-09-24 11:20:45+08:00:

that splits Chinese controlled areas to other countries(like Russia, UK, Portugal), that’s how current China’s border are formed.

Um, no? The only full territorial concessions were, with the exception of Macau and Hong Kong, small leaseholds – international settlements in treaty ports, and a few naval bases like Port Arthur, Guangzhouwan, and Weihaiwei. There were broader economic ‘spheres of influence’ entitling certain powers exclusive rights to investment, but the Qing handed over very little in terms of direct territorial sovereignty.

—– 822.3 —–2022-09-24 11:34:07+08:00:

The Great Wall was built 2000 years ago

500, actually, in terms of what we would recognise. While there were older earthworks these were not maintained past the Han period.

—– 822.4 —–2022-09-24 14:14:31+08:00:

The Sino-Russian treaties are complicated but in short the two earlier treaties (Nerchinsk and Kiakhta) gave control of territory to the Qing, but the territory lost in the Aigun, Peking, and St Petersburg treaties were territories over which the Qing had never actually exercised significant meaningful control. So while this did affect the Russo-Chinese border it’s not like land that was ancestrally Chinese suddenly vanished off the map, but rather the edges of the Manchu empire.

—– 822.5 —–2022-09-24 14:14:38+08:00:

No, Mongolia declared independence in 1911.

823: Do historians or archaeologists age faster than in other academic professions? Or is it just an academic profession thing to age faster in general?, submitted on 2022-09-23 10:06:07+08:00.

—– 823.1 —–2022-09-23 13:36:46+08:00:

Apologies, but we have had to remove your submission. We ask that questions in this subreddit be limited to those asking about history, or for historical answers. This is not a judgement of your question, but to receive the answer you are looking for, it would be better suited to /r/AskScience.

If you are interested in an historical answer, however, you are welcome to rework your question to fit the theme of this subreddit and resubmit it.

824: HEY HOW WHO WOOOOOOOOO, submitted on 2022-09-23 11:41:17+08:00.

—– 824.1 —–2022-09-23 13:42:59+08:00:

Wait what? I thought it was supposed to be in Kwun Tong

825: Did Cixi speak/read/write Manchu?, submitted on 2022-09-23 12:33:49+08:00.

—– 825.1 —–2022-09-26 17:33:52+08:00:

The answer to the main question is really quite simple and uninteresting: Cixi spoke and read little to no Manchu. According to Murata Yujiro in ‘The late Qing “national language” issue and monolingual systems: Focusing on political diplomacy’ (2016), at private functions Cixi received salutations in Mandarin followed by Manchu; it was alleged that Manchu officials found it easier to go before Cixi than the Guangxu Emperor because the former would not actually understand what they were reporting; and the Guangxu Emperor specifically ordered that memoranda and petitions from regional officials that would otherwise be purely in Manchu ought to be delivered bilingually for Cixi’s benefit.

But it’s your sub-question that really has some meat we can dig into, as it really gets into some of the more complex dimensions of Manchu identity in the late Qing period. The key thing to understand is that Manchu identity had never really been tied to an idealised package of cultural norms and behaviours, which we can broadly term the fe doro (‘old way’). While this concept was invoked as early as 1632 by Hong Taiji, it would be reinvented during the Qianlong reign (1736-96/9), but – for reasons we will get into – neither wholly successfully, nor in a way particularly relevant to Cixi’s case. She could very easily have seen herself as indisputably Manchu without actually speaking the Manchu language, and there are a few principal reasons for that.

Firstly, Manchu identity was simply not rooted in the behaviours prescribed by the Qianlong court. As Mark Elliott put it, there was a continual search for ‘coherence’ to Manchu identity under the Qing as the Banner population came to be spread out across the empire. Attempts to rotate people between the garrisons and Beijing to create a geographical basis for this ‘coherence’, rooting them in a common understanding of Beijing as the centre of Manchu society, broke down by the late seventeenth century amid the impracticalities of the scheme, but it would be some time before the Qing state attempted to establish a new source of ‘coherence’. This would be the invented tradition of the fe doro, which the Qianlong Emperor promulgated as an ideal set of practices by which the essence of the Manchu people would be preserved. While efforts to promote practice of the fe doro continued through the Qianlong reign, the simple fact was the Qing could not really justify the necessary expenditure to outright enforce this cultural package. What it did do, however, was to significantly contract the size of the Banners, and to rework its ethnic makeup to massively downscale the number of Han and ‘Martial-Han’ members relative to Manchus, partly by expulsion and partly by reclassification. Manchu identity going forward would thus cohere around the Banner system as an institution, which meant that the members of individual garrison quarters stuck together and formed bonds as clearly-defined communities, parallel to but separate from the neighbouring Han cities. So, to begin with, Cixi would have been a Manchu because she was part of a community of self-identifying Manchus, not because she acted like the ideal Manchus imagined by a Qing emperor who had, in any case, died four decades before she was born.

Secondly, there was a distinct Manchu cultural identity, but it was one that was organically shaped by the patterns of life in the Banner garrisons rather than imposed by imperial fiat. Manchu clans practiced their own variations on shamanism, influenced by the imperial rites but not actual copies, nor intended to be. Manchu naming practices remained distinct, as although most Manchus by this stage used a Chinese bisyllabic name optionally transliterated into Manchu, they did not adopt the Han-style surname-given name format, as the clan name did not function as a surname. (So to illustrate, Puyi’s name was simply Puyi – ‘Aisin Gioro Puyi’ is an incorrect appellation. Similarly, Jinliang of the Suwan Gūwalgiya clan was named Jinliang, full stop, not Suwan Gūwalgiya Jinliang.) Manchu women were considerably, though not enormously, freer than their Han counterparts both socially and legally, and refused to practice footbinding; they were also distinguished by their different styles of dress from Han women – distinctive hair (typically tied at the back rather than the top), tighter sleeves, and customarily three earrings per ear rather than the one typical of Han women. Even though Cixi knew little to no Manchu, this was not actually a vital part of Manchu cultural self-expression.

I ought at this juncture to note that proficiency in the Manchu language still existed to a considerable extent, especially among men and especially in Beijing – as you may indeed be able to infer from the first paragraph with the tidbit about Manchu officials. What ought to be stressed is that while Manchu proficiency was common, it was not considered an essential cultural norm. Cixi’s not being able to speak Manchu might not necessarily have been the norm, but it would still have been reasonably common, and not something that had a considerable bearing on one’s sense of Manchuness.

But the third and in some ways most important point is that the fe doro rhetoric was rooted not just in a crisis of ethnicity, but a crisis of masculinity, as the virtues and values that constituted its Qianlong-invented form were almost entirely those expected of Manchu men. The Qing court was not unconcerned with Manchu women, but it was less concerned, and indeed promoted a couple of practices common among Han women, most prominently widow chastity. Cixi cannot exactly be faulted for failing to live up to an ideal that she, as a woman, was not actually expected to live up to at the time. Moreover, her experience of Manchuness would have been even more strongly tied to her lived experience as a member of the Manchu community in Beijing, rather than the mandates of the imperial clan.

What makes Cixi unusual among the more Manchu-centric Qing rulers (the other major examples being the Kangxi and Qianlong Emperors) is that her formative years were spent as part of a middling family in a Beijing-based Banner clan, and not as part of the itinerant court. Her experience of Manchuness was derived from the patterns of garrison life, and not the ritualised ideal preserved in the imperial household. That is not to say the latter was somehow an inauthentic or incorrect vision or expression of Manchuness, but it certainly was a different one. Yet, to borrow a line of thinking from the Qianlong Emperor himself, that these were different forms of expression does not mean there was not still an underlying notion that there was something to be expressed. Cixi could be Manchu, and indeed specifically supportive of specifically Manchu interests, without speaking Manchu, because she came from a background in which that was entirely normal.

—– 825.2 —–2022-09-27 12:50:54+08:00:

The problem is that ‘Chinese’ is an English word that is applied to a variety of Chinese terms, and even the most conventional of those terms (中國人 Zhongguoren) has been one that has changed meaning over time. In a Qing context, in which 中國 Zhongguo was synonymous with the empire as a whole, then Cixi was unequivocally ‘Chinese’ in that she was a subject of the empire. In a Republican context, it becomes trickier because of the tension between the Republic’s stated aim of establishing a multiethnic nation while practically promoting Han interests, and it is certainly plausible that many Manchus did not see themselves as belonging to a national unit whose leading ethnic element had nearly attempted genocide against them. The PRC’s minority policy has been somewhat different, and most Manchus since the 1980s have been able to consider themselves ethnic Manchus within a broader Chinese nation.

826: IOS 16 has the ability to dictate texts in Cantonese. 你哋而家唔使打字！, submitted on 2022-09-23 14:14:23+08:00.

—– 826.1 —–2022-09-23 19:06:08+08:00:

I’ve been using Cantonese dictation on IOS for nearly 3 years now, it’s not new.

827: A response to Bite sized history about Portugal in r/badhistory leads to some bite sized drama in the comments when some take issue with with OPs fixation on some turn of phrases ., submitted on 2022-09-24 07:01:27+08:00.

—– 827.1 —–2022-09-25 01:29:46+08:00:

Changeling_Wil is, ByzantineBasileus isn’t.

source: am a (largely dormant) BH mod

Yeah so dormant I legit forgot he wasn’t.

—– 827.2 —–2022-09-25 20:23:50+08:00:

No wait shit he isn’t, I’m thinking of all the other mods that start with a C. I have been a disinformation dump today.

828: Why were early website names so on the nose, and how did they become so abstract in current times?, submitted on 2022-09-24 10:01:56+08:00.

—– 828.1 —–2022-09-24 14:35:09+08:00:

This submission has been removed because it violates our ‘20-Year Rule’. To discourage off-topic discussions of current events, questions, answers, and all other comments must be confined to events that happened 20 years ago or more. For further explanation of this rule, feel free to consult this Rules Roundtable.

829: what were the names of the skirt kind of things depictions of the ancient Roman armies wore?, submitted on 2022-09-24 11:15:02+08:00.

—– 829.1 —–2022-09-24 14:35:24+08:00:

Please repost this question to the weekly “Short Answers” thread stickied to the top of the subreddit, which will be the best place to get an answer to this question; for that reason, we have removed your post here. Standalone questions are intended to be seeking detailed, comprehensive answers, and we ask that questions looking for a name, a number, a date or time, a location, the origin of a word, the first/last instance of a specific phenomenon, or a simple list of examples or facts be contained to that thread as they are more likely to receive an answer there. For more information on this rule, please see this Rules Roundtable.

Alternatively, if you didn’t mean to ask a question seeking a short answer or a list of examples, but have a more complex question in mind, feel free to repost a reworded question. Examples of questions appropriate for the ‘Short Answers’ thread would be “Who won the 1932 election?” or “What are some famous natural disasters from the past?”. Versions more appropriate as standalone questions would be “How did FDR win the 1932 election?”, or “In your area of expertise, how did people deal with natural disasters?” If you need some pointers, be sure to check out this Rules Roundtable on asking better questions.

Finally, don’t forget that there are many subreddits on Reddit aimed at answering your questions. Consider /r/AskHistory (which has lighter moderation but similar topic matter to /r/AskHistorians), /r/explainlikeimfive (which is specifically aimed at simple and easily digested answers), or /r/etymology (which focuses on the origins of words and phrases).

830: How many original Declarations of Independence were signed?, submitted on 2022-09-24 12:03:04+08:00.

—– 830.1 —–2022-09-24 14:35:37+08:00:

Please repost this question to the weekly “Short Answers” thread stickied to the top of the subreddit, which will be the best place to get an answer to this question; for that reason, we have removed your post here. Standalone questions are intended to be seeking detailed, comprehensive answers, and we ask that questions looking for a name, a number, a date or time, a location, the origin of a word, the first/last instance of a specific phenomenon, or a simple list of examples or facts be contained to that thread as they are more likely to receive an answer there. For more information on this rule, please see this Rules Roundtable.

Alternatively, if you didn’t mean to ask a question seeking a short answer or a list of examples, but have a more complex question in mind, feel free to repost a reworded question. Examples of questions appropriate for the ‘Short Answers’ thread would be “Who won the 1932 election?” or “What are some famous natural disasters from the past?”. Versions more appropriate as standalone questions would be “How did FDR win the 1932 election?”, or “In your area of expertise, how did people deal with natural disasters?” If you need some pointers, be sure to check out this Rules Roundtable on asking better questions.

Finally, don’t forget that there are many subreddits on Reddit aimed at answering your questions. Consider /r/AskHistory (which has lighter moderation but similar topic matter to /r/AskHistorians), /r/explainlikeimfive (which is specifically aimed at simple and easily digested answers), or /r/etymology (which focuses on the origins of words and phrases).

831: How big were the Sun and stars considered to be in the early 20th century?, submitted on 2022-09-24 12:45:31+08:00.

—– 831.1 —–2022-09-24 14:36:09+08:00:

Please repost this question to the weekly “Short Answers” thread stickied to the top of the subreddit, which will be the best place to get an answer to this question; for that reason, we have removed your post here. Standalone questions are intended to be seeking detailed, comprehensive answers, and we ask that questions looking for a name, a number, a date or time, a location, the origin of a word, the first/last instance of a specific phenomenon, or a simple list of examples or facts be contained to that thread as they are more likely to receive an answer there. For more information on this rule, please see this Rules Roundtable.

Alternatively, if you didn’t mean to ask a question seeking a short answer or a list of examples, but have a more complex question in mind, feel free to repost a reworded question. Examples of questions appropriate for the ‘Short Answers’ thread would be “Who won the 1932 election?” or “What are some famous natural disasters from the past?”. Versions more appropriate as standalone questions would be “How did FDR win the 1932 election?”, or “In your area of expertise, how did people deal with natural disasters?” If you need some pointers, be sure to check out this Rules Roundtable on asking better questions.

Finally, don’t forget that there are many subreddits on Reddit aimed at answering your questions. Consider /r/AskHistory (which has lighter moderation but similar topic matter to /r/AskHistorians), /r/explainlikeimfive (which is specifically aimed at simple and easily digested answers), or /r/etymology (which focuses on the origins of words and phrases).

832: Are there any famous 3-way wars?, submitted on 2022-09-24 12:58:00+08:00.

—– 832.1 —–2022-09-24 14:36:27+08:00:

Please repost this question to the weekly “Short Answers” thread stickied to the top of the subreddit, which will be the best place to get an answer to this question; for that reason, we have removed your post here. Standalone questions are intended to be seeking detailed, comprehensive answers, and we ask that questions looking for a name, a number, a date or time, a location, the origin of a word, the first/last instance of a specific phenomenon, or a simple list of examples or facts be contained to that thread as they are more likely to receive an answer there. For more information on this rule, please see this Rules Roundtable.

Alternatively, if you didn’t mean to ask a question seeking a short answer or a list of examples, but have a more complex question in mind, feel free to repost a reworded question. Examples of questions appropriate for the ‘Short Answers’ thread would be “Who won the 1932 election?” or “What are some famous natural disasters from the past?”. Versions more appropriate as standalone questions would be “How did FDR win the 1932 election?”, or “In your area of expertise, how did people deal with natural disasters?” If you need some pointers, be sure to check out this Rules Roundtable on asking better questions.

Finally, don’t forget that there are many subreddits on Reddit aimed at answering your questions. Consider /r/AskHistory (which has lighter moderation but similar topic matter to /r/AskHistorians), /r/explainlikeimfive (which is specifically aimed at simple and easily digested answers), or /r/etymology (which focuses on the origins of words and phrases).

833: What policy from independent Jamaica had the most positive impact on the population? Other related questions about Jamaican Education/Archives/U of T faculty alumni writing or text search, submitted on 2022-09-24 20:17:12+08:00.

—– 833.1 —–2022-09-24 20:36:25+08:00:

This submission has been removed because it violates the rule on poll-type questions. These questions do not lend themselves to answers with a firm foundation in sources and research, and the resulting threads usually turn into monsters with enormous speculation and little focused discussion. Questions about the “most”, the “worst”, “unknown”, or other value judgments usually lead to vague, subjective, and speculative answers. For further information, please consult this Roundtable discussion.

For questions of this type, we ask that you redirect them to more appropriate subreddits, such as /r/history or /r/askhistory.

834: Why was the Silk Road trade so one-sided?, submitted on 2022-09-25 01:09:55+08:00.

—– 834.1 —–2022-09-25 09:49:46+08:00:

I’d amend the wording to suggest that Chinese merchants had no particular reason to travel more than a reasonable short hop into Central Asia or, as /u/Anekdota-Press notes, overseas to a reasonably accessible port. However, I would dispute /u/Anekdota-Press’ use of ‘Maritime Silk Road’ here on two grounds. Firstly, the ‘Maritime Silk Road’ as a term effectively exists solely to attempt to salvage some degree of validity to the ‘Silk Road’ concept without actually fixing its underlying theoretical problems. Secondly, although maritime routes did make up a considerable part of Chinese international trade, colloquial uses of the ‘Silk Road’ almost invariably refer to land routes, and it is not unreasonable for an answer about that (depending somewhat on context) to do the same.

—– 834.2 —–2022-09-25 20:33:09+08:00:

Fair points all round. To be extra-fair, the hardcore objection to the ‘Silk Road’ terminology has come out of the Central Asia field in the last 2-3 years or so, so I’m not surprised that it hasn’t travelled back in time to 2003, nor that maritime specialists are still a little bit behind in that regard. I’m probably not the one to propose an alternative, but simply referring to it as ‘Chinese maritime trade’ as something that demythologises the concept might be a way forward. But we’ll see what actual specialists in the field do.

835: Has there ever been an instance of a King’s first born heirs being twin boys? If so, how was succession determined?, submitted on 2022-09-25 11:58:26+08:00.

—– 835.1 —–2022-09-25 18:32:40+08:00:

Please repost this question to the weekly “Short Answers” thread stickied to the top of the subreddit, which will be the best place to get an answer to this question; for that reason, we have removed your post here. Standalone questions are intended to be seeking detailed, comprehensive answers, and we ask that questions looking for a name, a number, a date or time, a location, the origin of a word, the first/last instance of a specific phenomenon, or a simple list of examples or facts be contained to that thread as they are more likely to receive an answer there. For more information on this rule, please see this Rules Roundtable.

Alternatively, if you didn’t mean to ask a question seeking a short answer or a list of examples, but have a more complex question in mind, feel free to repost a reworded question. Examples of questions appropriate for the ‘Short Answers’ thread would be “Who won the 1932 election?” or “What are some famous natural disasters from the past?”. Versions more appropriate as standalone questions would be “How did FDR win the 1932 election?”, or “In your area of expertise, how did people deal with natural disasters?” If you need some pointers, be sure to check out this Rules Roundtable on asking better questions.

Finally, don’t forget that there are many subreddits on Reddit aimed at answering your questions. Consider /r/AskHistory (which has lighter moderation but similar topic matter to /r/AskHistorians), /r/explainlikeimfive (which is specifically aimed at simple and easily digested answers), or /r/etymology (which focuses on the origins of words and phrases).

836: Is hoarding considered a modern phenomena? If not, what are some historical figures to which the definition could be applied?, submitted on 2022-09-25 13:09:55+08:00.

—– 836.1 —–2022-09-25 18:32:50+08:00:

Please repost this question to the weekly “Short Answers” thread stickied to the top of the subreddit, which will be the best place to get an answer to this question; for that reason, we have removed your post here. Standalone questions are intended to be seeking detailed, comprehensive answers, and we ask that questions looking for a name, a number, a date or time, a location, the origin of a word, the first/last instance of a specific phenomenon, or a simple list of examples or facts be contained to that thread as they are more likely to receive an answer there. For more information on this rule, please see this Rules Roundtable.

Alternatively, if you didn’t mean to ask a question seeking a short answer or a list of examples, but have a more complex question in mind, feel free to repost a reworded question. Examples of questions appropriate for the ‘Short Answers’ thread would be “Who won the 1932 election?” or “What are some famous natural disasters from the past?”. Versions more appropriate as standalone questions would be “How did FDR win the 1932 election?”, or “In your area of expertise, how did people deal with natural disasters?” If you need some pointers, be sure to check out this Rules Roundtable on asking better questions.

Finally, don’t forget that there are many subreddits on Reddit aimed at answering your questions. Consider /r/AskHistory (which has lighter moderation but similar topic matter to /r/AskHistorians), /r/explainlikeimfive (which is specifically aimed at simple and easily digested answers), or /r/etymology (which focuses on the origins of words and phrases).

837: What’s up with Russia’s strong authoritarian tradition/culture? The Tsardom was much more authoritarian than contemporary European regimes. It then got replaced by an even more authoritarian Soviet regime, which itself got replaced by a “democratic” Russia which is still very authoritarian., submitted on 2022-09-25 13:45:30+08:00.

—– 837.1 —–2022-09-25 18:33:00+08:00:

This submission has been removed because it involves current events. To keep from discussion of politics, we have a 20-year rule here. You may want to try /r/ask_politics, /r/NeutralPolitics, or another current-events focused sub. For further explanation of this rule, feel free to consult this Rules Roundtable.

838: Can you help me find a generals name that lived about 100 years ago ?, submitted on 2022-09-25 16:21:08+08:00.

—– 838.1 —–2022-09-25 18:33:45+08:00:

Please repost this question to the weekly “Short Answers” thread stickied to the top of the subreddit, which will be the best place to get an answer to this question; for that reason, we have removed your post here. Standalone questions are intended to be seeking detailed, comprehensive answers, and we ask that questions looking for a name, a number, a date or time, a location, the origin of a word, the first/last instance of a specific phenomenon, or a simple list of examples or facts be contained to that thread as they are more likely to receive an answer there. For more information on this rule, please see this Rules Roundtable.

Alternatively, if you didn’t mean to ask a question seeking a short answer or a list of examples, but have a more complex question in mind, feel free to repost a reworded question. Examples of questions appropriate for the ‘Short Answers’ thread would be “Who won the 1932 election?” or “What are some famous natural disasters from the past?”. Versions more appropriate as standalone questions would be “How did FDR win the 1932 election?”, or “In your area of expertise, how did people deal with natural disasters?” If you need some pointers, be sure to check out this Rules Roundtable on asking better questions.

Finally, don’t forget that there are many subreddits on Reddit aimed at answering your questions. Consider /r/AskHistory (which has lighter moderation but similar topic matter to /r/AskHistorians), /r/explainlikeimfive (which is specifically aimed at simple and easily digested answers), or /r/etymology (which focuses on the origins of words and phrases).

839: What does the Abbreviation A.S.C mean?, submitted on 2022-09-25 18:28:01+08:00.

—– 839.1 —–2022-09-25 18:34:05+08:00:

Please repost this question to the weekly “Short Answers” thread stickied to the top of the subreddit, which will be the best place to get an answer to this question; for that reason, we have removed your post here. Standalone questions are intended to be seeking detailed, comprehensive answers, and we ask that questions looking for a name, a number, a date or time, a location, the origin of a word, the first/last instance of a specific phenomenon, or a simple list of examples or facts be contained to that thread as they are more likely to receive an answer there. For more information on this rule, please see this Rules Roundtable.

Alternatively, if you didn’t mean to ask a question seeking a short answer or a list of examples, but have a more complex question in mind, feel free to repost a reworded question. Examples of questions appropriate for the ‘Short Answers’ thread would be “Who won the 1932 election?” or “What are some famous natural disasters from the past?”. Versions more appropriate as standalone questions would be “How did FDR win the 1932 election?”, or “In your area of expertise, how did people deal with natural disasters?” If you need some pointers, be sure to check out this Rules Roundtable on asking better questions.

Finally, don’t forget that there are many subreddits on Reddit aimed at answering your questions. Consider /r/AskHistory (which has lighter moderation but similar topic matter to /r/AskHistorians), /r/explainlikeimfive (which is specifically aimed at simple and easily digested answers), or /r/etymology (which focuses on the origins of words and phrases).

840: [Hobby Scuffles] Week of September 26, 2022, submitted on 2022-09-25 23:00:15+08:00.

—– 840.1 —–2022-09-26 14:55:44+08:00:

Have certain historians of Central Asia chimed in to add that the Silk Road never actually existed outside the fevered imaginings of white antiquarians in the late 19th century?

—– 840.2 —–2022-09-26 16:48:31+08:00:

It does sound insane but that’s because it’s a concept so ingrained in the popular imagining that being told ‘hey, everything you think you know about it is wrong, including the idea it existed’ can be a bit jarring. I wrote a bit about it here on r/AskHistorians, but to condense it into a TL;DR:

The ‘Silk Road’ concept essentially posits that for basically all of pre-modern history, trade through Central Asia was driven by European (and Middle Eastern) demand for Chinese goods, which created a singular ‘Silk Road’ down which goods were intentionally moved immense distances across the Eurasian continent. The reality, however, is that transcontinental movement of goods was an emergent property of lots of regional market dynamics that shifted over time, such that it was never purely (or even primarily) about Silk and never a singular road. The Chinese were not producing goods for export to Europe, they were producing goods that happened to be sellable at a profit a few towns over, the surplus of which could be sold at profit a few towns over, and so on and so on until you got to Europe. This was also true of all the other economies on the continent, as the ‘Silk Road’ model essentially presumes that A: the economies of Central Asia, South Asia (what are now India/Pakistan/Bangladesh), and the Middle East are not worth considering, and B: that Central Asia is fundamentally tied to the whims of transcontinental trade, above and beyond domestic or regional commerce. Many versions of the model also fundamentally disregard or misunderstand the nature, extent, and chronology of maritime trade: shipping was as important if not more so than land transport for most Chinese states, at least by the second millennium, and far from causing continental trade to dry up, the emergence of direct maritime links to Europe stimulated economies across Eurasia – but especially in South Asia – and drove the volume of continental trade up.

Besides the factual issues there’s also a philosophical one, in that it effectively reduces Eurasia to two regions of importance: East Asia and Western Europe. Central Asia, in this model, derives its significance in world history from its being a mediator between the two regions, rather than because it does anything of interest in and of itself. South Asia fails to even show up because it is treated as adjacent to but not involved in the ‘more important’ Sino-European trade. Instead of properly looking at the big picture, the ‘Silk Road’ model makes a show of zooming out while it still focusses on the little pictures we were already looking at and blurs out the rest.

—– 840.3 —–2022-09-26 20:46:57+08:00:

Yes but the reality here is that the very phrase ‘Silk Road’ was coined by a German geographer in the 1890s. Nobody ever called it that at the time that the Central Asian caravan trade was a major thing.

—– 840.4 —–2022-09-26 21:11:46+08:00:

Actually, to be really pedantic here, WWI was being called the First World War in France by 1918.

But the bigger thing is, the ‘Silk Road’ genuinely never existed. There never was a singular route whose primary purpose was the intentional transport of silk from China to Europe. World War One is a phrase that is technically correct: it was the first conflict broadly recognised (albeit in the Western world) as having global scale, scope, and implications. ‘Silk Road’ is not: trade was about much more than silk, it happened by multiple routes on land and at sea, and it has heavily problematic implications for how we understand Eurasian history.

—– 840.5 —–2022-09-26 21:28:04+08:00:

Sure, but that’s come out of years of trying to wrestle the phrase ‘Silk Road’ into a situation that it describes badly, rather than doing the sensible thing of just not using the term anymore. It wasn’t about silk, and it wasn’t a road, but we’ll call it the Silk Road anyway because… reasons. Which sure, inertia can be a valid reason for doing things, but the nature of the ‘Silk Road’ as generally discussed is that it ties it all up in problematic narratives that regard long-distance trade as the most important part of Central Asia’s history rather than anything happening within the region in and of itself.

—– 840.6 —–2022-09-26 22:00:24+08:00:

This was the original meaning of the term – Ferdinand von Richtofen was merely describing a route described in Ptolemy’s Geographica by which one specific silk merchant claimed his silk originated. This then got morphed into ‘the route by which Chinese silk entered Europe throughout premodern history’, then ‘Central Asian trade routes in general’, and now to ‘any kind of trade anywhere, as long as China might be tangentially involved’.

—– 840.7 —–2022-09-26 22:15:44+08:00:

Which, again – if it’s not about silk and it’s not on a particular road, nor indeed only on roads… then why call it that?

—– 840.8 —–2022-09-26 23:22:07+08:00:

That’s probably the best way of putting it, but even then I would stress that there is no need to mystify the concept by giving it a capitalised name. We can speak, in the abstract, of ‘trans-Eurasian trade’ or ‘Chinese exports’ or what have you, i.e. use language targeted to specific contexts, rather than appeal to a term with huge amounts of problematic symbolic baggage.

—– 840.9 —–2022-09-26 23:24:57+08:00:

That’d be true if the Underground Railroad didn’t literally call itself the Underground Railroad, and the first people to do so were a bunch of white antiquarians centuries later. As stressed, ‘Silk Road’ is a term coined by Europeans to describe a non-European phenomenon, which over time gained certain mystical qualities that helped create an impression of the phenomenon described as unusual and distinctive when, in reality, all that was happening was the same old systems of trade that have characterised the majority of continental trade in Eurasia before the railway. It’s not just that the term is literally inaccurate, it’s also that it doesn’t actually meaningfully describe anything once you strip away the gloss and realise that there’s nothing special going on. It’s just Eurasian commerce.

—– 840.10 —–2022-09-27 00:19:14+08:00:

If that’s what you’ve taken from it I must have miscommunicated horribly, because I haven’t said that at all. I’m insisting that you can’t use ‘road’ in the singular to describe all the possible routes between two places. To use a specific example, let’s take this bit of the UK: if I were to try to get from Margaretting to Howe Green, I could go straight there by the A12 or I could take the A414 into Chelmsford and then the A1114 out. I could coin the phrase ‘The Margaretting to Howe Green Road’ to describe either of these roads, but I cannot use it to simultaneously describe both.

Now imagine using the singular phrase ‘Silk Road’ to describe this entire network of maritime and non-maritime trade routes. (And the map is already highly simplified.)

—– 840.11 —–2022-09-27 09:34:41+08:00:

Yep.

—– 840.12 —–2022-09-27 15:07:38+08:00:

we can’t enter for the forseeable future

By which you mean 2 weeks, right? Japan’s essentially completely reopening international tourism as of 11 October: https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2022/09/23/national/kishida-japan-border-opening/

—– 840.13 —–2022-09-27 15:13:50+08:00:

We could indeed.

—– 840.14 —–2022-09-28 15:20:15+08:00:

What, and I cannot stress this enough, the actual fuck.

—– 840.15 —–2022-09-29 14:19:01+08:00:

Rob has been in a long-term relationship with Tamara Chambers since at least 2012 and they married in late 2020; Chambers has been part of the Nostalgia Critic cast since January 2014 when she replaced Rachel Tietz. That’s a pretty direct tie between him and CA. It is therefore also impossible that Scallon didn’t know about ChangeTheChannel, although he and Tamara have kept their professional lives relatively separate for a good few years now (to the point where at one stage I thought they’d broken up), so whatever his feelings about Doug and CA they’re probably not weighing too heavily on them.

—– 840.16 —–2022-09-29 21:54:52+08:00:

Rachel has a pretty active Twitter account and has apparently still been doing acting and a bit of music as well. It seems she’s mainly in theatre these days which would explain her lack of significant IMDB presence. I came across a podcast appearance she did back in March last year discussing her experience in acting and music; I haven’t listened to it at great length but it may have more for those interested in where she’s been since leaving NC.

—– 840.17 —–2022-09-29 22:09:15+08:00:

Also realising that Tietz left in 2014 has made me feel horribly old. That was hot drama at the time.

If you want to really feel the passage of time, Demo Reel began airing on 30 October 2012 and Rachel’s last regular Nostalgia Critic appearance was on 7 January 2014, so she appeared as part of the regular DR/NC cast for 434 days. Tamara has been an NC regular since 21 January 2014, so she has been there for 3173 days – nearly 7 and a half times as long as Rachel. This might also explain how Rachel didn’t really get involved in Change The Channel – she was there only after the anniversary movies, and for less than 15 months, so she wasn’t there for a long time to really deal with the deeper structural issues, nor was she there for the really big fiascos. Also, unlike most of the Change The Channel contributors, she wasn’t an independent content creator for CA/TGWTG, but hired by Doug for his own projects, which, like Malcolm and Tamara, adds a certain level of distance from the big issues, which (aside from the anniversary movies) involved the treatment of the more ‘top-level’ content creators.

文章版权归原作者所有。
二维码分享本站